Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B2362E003D for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:00:10 -0300 (ADT) Received: from developer.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 52560-02 for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:00:01 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from mail01.enterprisedb.com (webmail.enterprisedb.com [63.246.7.168]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 971A82E0032 for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:00:01 -0300 (ADT) thread-index: AcipHxkaNu6PuqMHRgGGyTiTbHfKcg== Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message Importance: normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4133 Received: from [192.168.1.10] ([82.2.135.165]) by mail01.enterprisedb.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 28 Apr 2008 07:00:40 -0400 Message-ID: <4815AE24.60909@enterprisedb.com> Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 11:59:48 +0100 From: "Heikki Linnakangas" Organization: EnterpriseDB User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20080110) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Gregory Stark" Cc: "Josh Berkus" , "Euler Taveira de Oliveira" , "Greg Smith" , "postgres performance list" Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Benchmarks WAS: Sun Talks about MySQL References: <480F8C2D.6010806@emproshunts.com> <4811D1DD.9030401@otg-nc.com><20080425130105.GA19447@crankycanuck.ca><36e682920804250741p33d621f3gf35e6bdebe2e0531@mail.gmail.com><20080425152053.GE19447@crankycanuck.ca><481278E7.9030504@timbira.com> <87wsmlm90e.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com><4814BDB8.2030108@agliodbs.com> <877iei9w4r.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com> In-Reply-To: <877iei9w4r.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Apr 2008 11:00:40.0937 (UTC) FILETIME=[190C3590:01C8A91F] X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200804/388 X-Sequence-Number: 29881 Gregory Stark wrote: > TPC-E has more stringent requirements which explicitly require very consistent > response times and I doubt 8.2 would have been able to pass them. Sure it would. Just not for a very large scale factor ;-). -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com